SARH Woes (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> The War Room



Message

Eboreg -> SARH Woes (6/23/2019 6:01:00 AM)

So I've going down the line of standalone scenarios lately and I just have one thing to say:

****! SARH!

Seriously, it seems like I have fire dozens of those things just to down one enemy fighter and I frequently take unsustainable losses in return, especially when getting into heater range. What are the best doctrine settings when your side only has Semi-Active Radar Homing missiles?



goldfinger35 -> RE: SARH Woes (6/23/2019 8:07:22 AM)

Set WRA to 50% of maximum range so you maximize your chanches of hit and you fire before enemy does (more than 50% if enemy missiles are also SARH and have longer range).
Set plane altitude to 20.000.
10 seconds after firing first missile, fire second.
10 seconds after firing second missile, fire third.

Idea so to keep him low after first misisle (which he usually evades by diving low) and on defensive. If he fires any SARH missiles, they will loose guidance because he will have to turn to avoid yours. You could even maybe temporarily turn off automatic evasion.



Gunner98 -> RE: SARH Woes (6/23/2019 10:25:09 AM)

How do you think the USAF felt in Viet Nam after spending bucket loads of $$$ and adopting a 'Missile only' policy for the F-4...

"AIM-7D achieved Pk of 8%, which increased to 10% for AIM-7E. AIM-7E2, introduced in last year of the war to correct AIM-7Es fusing problems, achieved Pk of 8%. Despite having long spin-up time, M61 20 mm rotary cannon achieved Pk of 26%."

https://defenseissues.net/2013/06/15/air-to-air-weapons-effectiveness/

https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=600


I'm not suggesting a change... but if anything the game gives the Aim-7 more than it deserves...

All I can add to goldfinger's comments is to attack from multiple angles - including altitude: 1 above, 1 below the target from 90-120* apart



Gunner98 -> RE: SARH Woes (6/24/2019 7:41:45 PM)

Found this post on Twitter.



[image]local://upfiles/16451/66F890BC73544667B1DB5338F7842CD0.jpg[/image]



Ancalagon451 -> RE: SARH Woes (6/24/2019 9:43:33 PM)

What's the difference between misses and failures?

Ancalagon



Primarchx -> RE: SARH Woes (6/24/2019 11:39:57 PM)

Misses get off the rail, get moving, but don't hit because they're out-maneuvered, spoofed, out of envelope or just go stupid. Failures either don't get off the rail or just fall free and don't have their booster ignite.



goldfinger35 -> RE: SARH Woes (6/25/2019 8:03:59 AM)

Great find Gunner. Is there any data for ARH missiles? I wonder about success of 4xAmraam configuration for F-35...



Gunner98 -> RE: SARH Woes (6/25/2019 10:19:03 AM)

quote:

any data for ARH missiles


Not many have been fired in anger so the data is thin. If one thing is certain test results on this type of missile, are dubious. Here are some performance tests but no Ph tests: http://www.zaretto.com/sites/zaretto.com/files/missile-aerodynamic-data/AIM120C5-Performance-Assessment-rev2.pdf

According to Wiki - As of 2017, the AIM-120 AMRAAM has shot down eleven aircraft (six MiG-29s, one MiG-25, one MiG-23, one Su-22, one Soko J-21 Jastreb, and one UH-60 Black Hawk).

But no indication of how many were fired to achieve that, probably a fairly low number but .

Here is another interesting article on how to defeat A2A missiles: https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-270109-1.html

B



Primarchx -> RE: SARH Woes (6/25/2019 6:38:57 PM)

One piece of anecdotal evidence on AIM-120 effectiveness is the 2017 F/A-18E shoot down of a Syrian Su-22 which missed with an AIM-9X at first due to seeker seduction then followed up and splashed it with a Slammer at close range.



hasler -> RE: SARH Woes (7/20/2019 6:36:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

How do you think the USAF felt in Viet Nam after spending bucket loads of $$$ and adopting a 'Missile only' policy for the F-4...

"AIM-7D achieved Pk of 8%, which increased to 10% for AIM-7E. AIM-7E2, introduced in last year of the war to correct AIM-7Es fusing problems, achieved Pk of 8%. Despite having long spin-up time, M61 20 mm rotary cannon achieved Pk of 26%."

https://defenseissues.net/2013/06/15/air-to-air-weapons-effectiveness/

https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=600


I'm not suggesting a change... but if anything the game gives the Aim-7 more than it deserves...

All I can add to goldfinger's comments is to attack from multiple angles - including altitude: 1 above, 1 below the target from 90-120* apart



That’s a little disingenuous to lump all AIM-7s into the problems saw with the Vietnam era models. If you go to the last major war the missile was used in it went 30 hits for 44 shots or a 68% hit rate. The AIM-7M and P should be very deadly.

I also contest the info in you defense issues blog. Especially considering it is attributing multiple launches to the us navy. There were only two engagements one where an f18 used an aim-9 and an AIM-7 and a F14 that used an AIM-9 on a mi-8. The fact that source attempts to say the US navy fired 21 AIM-7s and almost 40 Aim-9s calls the entire article into question



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.59375